@thesaltyseagames 4 ай бұрын
The venn diagram here is great data viz. Love to see that.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
many thanks :)
@000NULL 4 ай бұрын
Something that I’ve looked at recently is mission type. The Rumble Packs always favor horde warbands, and it’s just math. The quantity and location of objectives missions invariably favor skewing talls and smalls. The Salty Sea’s mission packs are slightly more balanced for 7-9 model warbands, but they still aren’t universally balanced. Your ideas are good. I think I would back up and start with how the factions should play, how the individual warbands should play, and then doing a rebalance of attack-defense-movement on a point-value base. Skeleton: Defense: 8HP*3t=value of 24 Movement 3”*2= Value of 6 Attack (4A*3S*1R)+((3c+1h)/2)= Value of 14 Generic 100pt fighter Defense 15hp*4t=60(100%) Movement 5”*2=10(100%) Attack (4a*3s*1r)+((2+4)/2)=15(100%) Then you recalculate the skeleton 24/60=40% 6/10=60% 14/15=90% Then you average the percent differences to deduce a point-cost (40+60+90)/3 = Skeletons are 60pts (63.3333) Cross check with vampire lord (125/60+ 10/10+ 20/15)(208+0+150%)3=119 overcost, so the Vampire lord should be 220pts Crap this is coming out really close
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
Haha, looks good! Ib think that for most things we are real close already tbh. I did a whole big analysis on a point for point basis and in the movement 4-6 range things come out real close to what I expected then to be
@blazingknight. 4 ай бұрын
Think we're long overdue an FAQ and errata at least and ideally a full ToC. There are points costs that need adjustments, rules that need fixes, all the White Dwarf publications need to be consolidated in one place. To be honest, the studio's current approach is slowly becoming a concern. Like, just release new two-warband boxes, that's all. I'm not trying to doomsay or anything, but it feels like the community is left by the studio a bit. Regarding your proposals, those look quite good. Wonder if it's time for the community to adopt and test your proposals if GW are unwilling to update
@rexanael243 4 ай бұрын
I'd like them to tweak their formula where that would also address the most broken issues. It is hard to see GW taking an individual balancing approach. Essentially if toughness and damage profiles scaled higher in points cost it think that would go a long way. You would want the scaling to be parabolic, not linear and potentially use a baseline of 3 for toughness and 2/4 for melee and 1/3 for ranged. Discounts for under those values and exponential increases above. For me, the most busted profiles always seem to be high toughness and high damage output. As you said, either one-shotting midrange or surviving and countering too efficiently.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
I think that will most likely come in a future Warcry 3.0 (if it comes) - that represents some pretty radical points changes for most fighters in the game but yeah, would be ideal.
@JimCrimmins 4 ай бұрын
These are very reasonable adjustments for quality of game improvements... Warcry having a quite open list building framework is both a strength and a weakness.. It's fun to list brew, but the door opens for abuse. Bladeborn fighters in general need repointing.. And every competitive chaos band has a Fomo Crusher (this speaks volumes about a stale meta). We know what's top choice, just always take it.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
This is very true ofcourse. I do think though that relatively minor changes are what the game wants; We are consistently hearing from players that those last 5 points mean the difference between taking that FoMo or not so boosting its points by even a small amount would go a long way to giving more interesting listbuilding choices for Chaos.
@anotherzingbo 4 ай бұрын
Personally i would also like to see a change to Counter. Traditionally GW seemed to represent highly skilled but not powerful fighters by giving them low strengths but lots of attacks. But Counter results in these fighters being incredibly vulnerable whenever they attack. Finding some way for Counter to be useful while not heavily punishing this sort of fighter would help a bunch of warbands.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
I've actually been doing a bunch on maths on counter; those fighters that typically tend to use it are generally cheap chaff with t4/5 (looking at you OBR!) so the points bumps should help there. Also, those fighters that tend to use it do on average 2ish damage per combat attack so there are some times there its just WAY better to counter then to just attack. I think that some sort of limit to counter to 3 damage or similar would still allow fighters that rely on counter as an actual source of damage (Nighthaunt for example) to do things whilst avoiding the big blowout 8+ counter wound attacks.
@santowashere 4 ай бұрын
I've been having some of same lines thoughts about the balance of the game, I'm glad I'm not the only one and you did a great job of structuring it in an easy to digest format. Hopefully GW will take some inspiration lol
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
Fingers Crossed XD
@jakew5115 4 ай бұрын
Can’t us poor Horns players have a strong warband while we still exist? We’ll be “balanced“ soon enough. I’m going back to my pity party now.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
Hah, even with a 5 point increase to shatters, Horns are still real good
@anotherzingbo 4 ай бұрын
Getting a reduction to Ruinators to offset the increase to Shatterers would be nice. Even compared to other midrange fighters Ruinators seen expensive. They compare unfavourably to Chaos Warriors yet cost more, for instance.
@ogremark5 4 ай бұрын
I'd love for WarCry to get more positive attention from GW. In terms of GW games that need to be "fixed", WarCry is at the bottom of the list. It's relatively easy to collect, get on the table, and play. I wish KillTeam was as easy and intuitive to play.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
Warcry is getting regular releases and pretty much all new AoS stuff is ported over which is great. My only wish is regular points tweaks to avoid the meta going stale.
@nicklaslundstrom7924 4 ай бұрын
Agree overall! The aethercannon could need a bigger increase (+20-30?) , as could the Ogre and Fomoroid (+15?). And I would leave the shatterers alone and nerf the flame hurler a bit instead. A bespoke team that does something best is a thing to cherish! :-)
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
TBH i think that the aethercannon could take more but that combined with the Arkanauts and other stuff feels like quite a big change to make all in one place :)
@balemoran3168 4 ай бұрын
Allies need fixing. when your playing in to the grand alliance and just the most efficient pics as allies it makes competitive events feel a little ground hog day. people have plays three games out of five in to different factions but due to allies it was the same minis with different chaff. this pick strongest allies +chaff is the biggest issue for warcry popularity. I think a 20% tax could well be warranted to encourage people to play in warband.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
I think largely the game could probably be just fine allowing only the one ally but I feel like that just shifts the power about and doesn't actually address the issue of some (not all) heroes being too cheap for what they bring to the game; If a faction has hard hitting fighters (ex. SCE Thunderstrike) thats fine, but their heroes should almost be a premium.
@Suffkopp2k 4 ай бұрын
The Graveguard with Great Blade is way too cheap. They wreck nearly everything.🙈
@KennyHamilton-kf4vb 4 ай бұрын
My brother and I play casually and the games with dwarves have been really one sided. We are going to try some of these point changes based on this video: +5 to chaffs, +5 to anything with FFP, +10 to the Grundstoks, with aether getting +20 (fun to use but wayyy too strong)
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
That's something like what I would do, yeah
@TheCrimsonSophist 4 ай бұрын
I am curious to get your thoughts about what happens to SCE Thunderstrike list building if you increase the Annihilator point values. They are certainly more powerful than they should be for the points, but i feel they require movement support (for example, Calthia) to ensure they are relevant. My experience is that it's already pretty tight with little wiggle room if you're trying to get 7 fighters, so with an increase in points, your options would be to either take gryph hounds, or drop a model to 6. I've not played a lot of games outside a small group of people, though, so maybe I'm missing things.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
Whilst it's true that SCE: Thunderstrike under my ideas will probably go back down to 6 fighters unless you do something really fruity and go like a whole bunch of Starblood Stalkers as Bladeborn; the whole idea is to make those really big warbands smaller by one or two fighters, and also bring in the REALLY big fighters as well which should give SC of all kinds a little easier time. Annihilators themselves are still very efficient even with a 10 points bump but the overall effect should mean that there are less 11-13 man warbands and more 8-9 man warbands out there which should help keep them fairly relevant.
@sloeginify 4 ай бұрын
@offmetamusings How much impact do you think you can have by just adjusting terrain? I'm quite new to warcry but it feels like by increasing the amount of terrain (significantly) you'll punish both move 3 fighters and big bases
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
100% terrain has a big impact. At Warhammer World they like to put out about 1.5 boxes worth of terrain for Warcry and it does alot for the game in restricting both monsters/big fighters and M3. I also like alot of verticality in my boards so that warbands with that high movement can make use out of it.
@ojkasper 4 ай бұрын
I'm not that scared of the Soulblight as I used to be, the ressurrection nerf hit them hard. I'm actually more concerned for the handfull of warbands that noone wants to play. Elfs and Ghosts are kinda unplayable (especially ghosts) and thats really a shame.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
I've been playing a whole bunch of ghosts recently to decent enough success; sure they aren't beating out S-Tier KO but they are at least functional with the right builds. It's mostly about managing expectations though XD
@philippmarx8362 4 ай бұрын
How many POINTS for the Fregatte?
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
200, its a steal XD
@jb3371 4 ай бұрын
What they ned to do is improve other chaffs.
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
I don't necessarily think that improving all the other chaff fighters in the game is worth it vs hitting the 5-8 actual best units; Also I wanted to avoid a scenario where midrange is pushed out even further and improving other chaff units would certainly do that.
@markfewster5250 4 ай бұрын
No allies allowed, and maybe points and a tier limit. Eg 2 heroes, x mid level fighters, x number of chaff within the 1000 points. No allies the important one. Like the commemt above about an allies tax
@OffMetaMusings 4 ай бұрын
I've never actually played (competitively) with no allies; Casually though I've done a bunch and I'm split on the idea; on the one hand i think that it would cut down on the amount of actual viable warbands (there seems to be alot of variance between some of them them in terms of power) but on the other, I think that a half way house of only one ally might be beneficial to the game.
PotatoMcWhiskey
Рет қаралды 348 М.